Scott, A. (1989). A question of judgement: ‘He was a Cabinet Minister and I was merely a candidate’. Free Associations, 1Q:106-117.

Welcome to PEP Web!

Viewing the full text of this document requires a subscription to PEP Web.

If you are coming in from a university from a registered IP address or secure referral page you should not need to log in. Contact your university librarian in the event of problems.

If you have a personal subscription on your own account or through a Society or Institute please put your username and password in the box below. Any difficulties should be reported to your group administrator.

Username:

Password:

Can't remember your username and/or password? If you have forgotten your username and/or password please click here and log in to the PaDS database. Once there you need to fill in your email address (this must be the email address that PEP has on record for you) and click "Send." Your username and password will be sent to this email address within a few minutes. If this does not work for you please contact your group organizer.

I have had an interest in Sara Keays and her significance for public debates around power and sexuality ever since her statement to The Times in October 1983. There she did more than put her side of the story of her relationship with MP Cecil Parkinson: she challenged the hypocrisy of newspapers like the Daily Telegraph, which felt that a discreet abortion was ‘greatly to be preferred’ to a scandal. ‘I was not aware’, she wrote then, ‘that political expediency was sufficient grounds for an abortion under the 1967 Act’ (The Times, 14 October 1983). The Times leader column, for its part, acknowledged that Keays had squarely faced the issue of the double standard in matters of sexual morality, especially in political life. The editorial, while circumspect in tone, implied the need for urgent public debate about morality for a time like the present, in which women were entitled to pursue their own careers without sacrificing their wishes for a personal life too. For it is now well known that Sara Keays has lost her chances of a parliamentary career. But as a result of … what exactly? Her refusal to go for a discreet abortion; her refusal, by writingA Question of Judgement, to maintain a permanently dignified silence; her clever timing in coming to an agreement with the Daily Mirror to serialize her book during the Tory Party conference of 1985 — all these are mentioned, in hostile notices, as evidence of Keays's vindictive bitterness, the ‘classic’ behaviour of a woman scorned. In part I see them differently — as an aspect of a powerful, radical/respectable critique of one aspect of our culture: its attitude

- 106 -

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]